Re: linkat(2)

[Emmanuel Dreyfus <manu%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 04:27:12PM +0000, David Holland wrote:
>  > Does that mean AT_FDCW should be guarded by #ifdef _NETBSD_SOURCE 
>  > until the whole Extended API Set Part 2 is implemented?
> 
> There's a preexisting patch set for *at somewhere. It got rejected in
> its original form because it did horrible things instead of
> interfacing semi-sanely to namei.

But that does not answer the original question: it is sane to 
ifdef _NETBSD_SOURCE a partial implementation of linkat(), while the
full thing is not yet ready.

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
manu%netbsd.org@localhost